About your Search

20120930
20120930
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
assessed claims made by president obama and mitt romney as the campaign ahead of their first debate. they were from people with the fact, the washington post, and the -- politifact, "the washington post," and [unintelligible] this is one-and-a-half hours. >> good morning. my name is kathleen hall jamieson. i direct the annenberg public policy center at university of pennsylvania. welcome to our session -- this includes sessions trying to address the question, what is the role of journalism in a debunking deceptions and holding candidates accountable? to set the fringe for our discussion, we are releasing the results of a survey of adults, with a margin of error of 3.2%. we will offer as our conclusion that the public has a lot to learn about the 2012 presidential race. also, we will say that those who seek out fact checking on the internet, do no more. here are specifics. a sizable proportion of the public fails to understand the plan and records of major presidential candidates. when people watch debates, the level of knowledge improves. we expect in the second, third, and third wa
discussed would offer opportunities for governor romney or president obama to score political points. and what that argument might sound like on these issues. is there any chance that either of them will try to do something like this? >> i think it would be a reference back. because the economy takes all the oxygen out of the election with a little bit of foreign affairs, the supreme court does not play against undecided voters. it is a motivator to get out and get to the polls. you want this person to replace justice ginsberg when she retires for example. you want to know if there's any practical experience, and the obama at the lustration has declined to defend the defense of marriage act. present romney might decide he would defend the constitutionality of that statute. it does seem like that has a lot of salience and presidential debates. i.t. think it will not happen. here is why. no major national political figure has attacked as publicly since 1996 or before. it is remarkable. the republicans were seeing some political profit in attacking affirmative action given the polls. th
the society. it then becomes the coin toss. do we like mr. romney? we like mr. obama? do we prefer republicans to democrats? is the system cannot be debated, because everybody agrees the two parties will there be focused elsewhere on things like whether you can have a gun in the back of your truck or whether you do or do not approve of gay marriage, or a whole host of other issues whose importance i am not disputing, but issues get us away from this thorny problem of how economics and politics are articulate and there's a desire to sit in a society that that simply be ruled out of order. >> the five corporations that dominate what people in this country see here and read have perfected the art of propaganda in manufacturing consent while simultaneously criticizing dissent. but i want you to talk about the very origin of this, which could be traced to the much revered and in my view, much overrated founding fathers of any political rally. people talk about them in hushed tones. but let's hear what they have to say about these kinds of issues. james madison, who wrote the federalist papers, prin
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3